We see, then, that it was not Christ's object to reveal Himself to every one indiscriminately, but to those only who had a desire for that know- ledge, together with love and reverence. The training of such recipients was gentle and gradual. Manifestation to the hardened brought with it only condemnation. Concealment implied mercy. As man had deliberately put forth his hand and tasted of the forbidden tree, so must he show by his deliberate action that he wished to taste of the tree of life, the true knowledge of God and of His Son revealed in the Incarnation (Jn 17^).
But while we observe in our Lord's ministry this principle of reserve with regard both to the mysteries of the Kingdom and the truth about His own Person, He never concealed, or wished His disciples to conceal, the saving message of the gospel. The gospel was to be ' published among all nations' (Mk IS^o, RV 'preached'). The vb. K-qpvffdoi, which is used to denote a publication such as Jesus forbade of His miraculous cures (Mk l'*^ 7^^), is the same word as is constantly employed with reference to His own proclamation of the gospel (Mt 4^^ etc.) and His instruction to His disciples to proclaim it (Mt 10^ Mk 3^*, Lk 9^ etc.). When Ki)pvaati3 is used, however, in this specific sense, it is almost invariably rendered ' preach ' in EV. In Mk 13^", as noted above, RV has sub- stituted ' i)reach ' for ' publish ' of AY. See, further. Preaching, Revelation.
Literature. — Isaac Williams, The Study of the Gospels ; cf. also, on the confession of Christ's claims hy demoniacs, J. Weiss, Das ultcste Evantjelimn ; and artt. by W. Wrede ('Zur Messias- erkenntnis der Diimonen'), and B. W. Bacon ('The Markan Theory of Demonic Recognition of the Christ') in ZjVTW, 1904, p. 169'ff., and 1905, p. 153 flf.
C. H. Prichard and J. C. Lambert. PUNISHMENT.— 1. God's punishment of sin.—
For the sufferings of Christ for sin, see ATONE- MENT : the present article is concerned only with the punishment of men. The Gospel teaching on this important subject can be briefly summarized in a few paragraphs :
(«) The fact of punishment. — This fact is involved in certain explicit statements of our Lord Himself (Mt 13"- •'^ 25^«, Jn 152- «), and clearly suggested in more than one of His parables (Mk 12^ Mt 13^° 2213-1*, Lk 133-22ff.). It is further implied both in the recognition of God's wrath upon men (Jn 3^'^) and of a consequent difference in their destinies (Mt 13"- ^« 25*6, Jn 52a), and in frequent references to Gehenna (Mt S^** lO^s, Mk 9^=*-^8, Lk 12^) or to the place of outer darkness (Mt S^^ 22^3 253"). So serious may this punishment be, that death would be a preferable alternative (Mk 9*'^) ; and, unrestricted to individual transgressors, it may fall also both upon cities (Mt lO^^ ll-i 23^8) and
upon nations (Mt 2V^- •»* 23^^-^^). The principle of l)unishment was illustrated in our Lord's action (Mk 1112ft'- i5tt-. ijj a^g ^ygjj a^g inculcated in His words. (b) The expression of punishment. — God's punish- ment of men for sin, the fact of which is thus recog- nized by the Gospels, hnds expression in different ways, (a) Our Lord seems to hint that even in the conditions of a man's present life the penalty of sin may sometimes be perceived. At least it would apjjear that in certain cases He allows that a connexion exists between sin and physical sickne.ss (Mk 2'"- " ll Jn 5"). Nowhere, however, does He approve the view, which emerges in the OT, that a similar explanation accounts for the presence in the world of human sorroAv. (On the contrary, sorrow even becomes, in His esteem, a ground for rejoicing [Mt S'^-^^'^^]). Apart from these vague suggestions of a physical penaltj^ the Gospels recognize both a present and a future IJunishment of sin. (^) There is a sense in which a man's judgment, and hence his punishment, is immediate. And not only is this true in that his sin involves remorse (Mt 26''= 27'*- ^ Mk 6'«), but also because his very attitude to Chi-ist automati- cally enriches his personality or issues in its im- poverishment ( Jn 3i«- 19 91- "■ 12, Mt 2528- 29, cf. Lk 2^*). (7) There is a second sense in which a man's judgment lies in the future (Mt 13*^-*^ 2531^- and frequently). A discussion of the punishment re- sulting from that judgment does not fall within the scope of the present article, and the reader is therefore referred to the separate study on Eternal Punishment. Here it will sufhce to observe that, whatever be its accidents, the essence of punishment will consist in banishment from the presence of Christ (Mt 723 25^') ; and that it will be marked by varying degrees of severity (Mk 12''", Mt 101=^ 11--- 2\ Lk 12*8), each of us by his own use of opportunity providing his own criterion (Mt 5'' 71. 2 1033^ Mk 42*).
(p) The aim of punishment. — Punishment may be conceived as either disciplinary or retributive in its purpose. Our Lord Himself, in all probability with deliberate intent, made no unmistakable pronouncement on the meaning of the doom of the rejected. All that we can do, therefore, is to deduce from His words certain general considera- tions bearing more or less closely on the end that punishment has in view, (a) On the one hand, the teaching of the Gospels confirms the verdict of our OM'n moral sen.se, that so long as there is any hope of a sinner's recovery, the reformatory element must at least be prominent in the transaction. Inasmuch as judgment is self-acting (Jn 'X^'^ 123i), it inevitably accompanies God's gift of His Son (Jn 318 ; see Westcott, in loc.) ; yet we are specifically taught that not judgment ibut salvation is God's deepest thought for mankind (Jn 31^ ; so Mt 18^^, Jn 639 gu^ Lk 15, cf. also Jn h'% It is in keeping with this that of the two words denoting ' punish- ment,' KoXaaLs and ri/xcopla, distinguished in classical Greek as respectively remedial and penal in their purpose (so Plato; see Trench, Si/n. § vii.), it is the former that is preserved in the rejwrt of Christ's teaching (Mt 25''6). That the classical shade of meaning is retained in the NT is signified by the suggestive use of KoXd^eadai in 2 P 2", where the punishment precedes judgment, and therefore could scarcely yet be retributive. (/3) On the other hand, the terms in whicli Christ refers to punishment {e.g. Mt 183=, Lk 20*' etc.) would seem to forbid us to reduce it to the mere equivalent of discipline ; and He Himself, in speaking of sin that has no forgiveness (Mk 3^8 ||, cf. ]\Ik U-^i and 1 Jn 5^^), distinctly implies a punishment that is retributive in character. The proportion in which the.se two elements in the Divine punish- ment of men are combined, is beyond our know-